Go naming conventions

Ask most product owners about their address data, and they’ll probably tell you that “it’s good enough. ” But when it comes to address data integrity, the word “enough” should give you serious pause. When it comes to address data, “close enough” is how businesses end up with wasted marketing spend, compliance headaches, failed deliveries, and policies that don’t hold up. It doesn’t matter if you're underwriting insurance on a home, scheduling a broadband install, or mailing a benefits enrollment kit—accuracy isn’t a nice-to-have.

In the world of address validation, not all providers stick to the script. Some go rogue. And while that might work for improv geniuses like Robin Williams or even our own Brady Amundson, when your verification tools start improvising results, creating fictional addresses, and hoping you don’t notice… well, it's like watching a movie adaptation of your favorite book and thinking, “Wait… they burned down the Burrow?!?” (Harry Potter fans, I’m still mad. )If your address verification tool is delivering results that feel more like fan fiction than factual data, and geolocating “validated” addresses in the middle of lakes, it might be time to reconsider the cast.

Getting deliveries right starts with getting addresses right. In today’s “I want it now“ world of online shopping, customers expect their orders to show up on time and without any hiccups. And the stakes are high: 87% of customers trust brands with excellent customer service. That’s a big deal when it comes to loyalty. But when something goes wrong — like a package sent to the wrong place, delayed by days, or lost in shipping limbo — trust takes a nosedive. Frustrated customers are less likely to come back and more likely to spread the word (the not-so-good kind).